Pretty much. /3
Praises -- deservedly -- SSCI members for really digging into these issues in a bipartisan way. /6
FB has done a lot; I am not minimizing. But, the impact of those measures up for debate /9
Both FB and Twitter say they are blocking/removing millions of accounts a week. Think about the scale of what that means for the veracity and trustworthiness of info on platforms. /12
Sandberg: sharing what you want when you want to without anyone's permission. "giving a voice."
Sandberg sounds so scripted it's hard to take much of this seriously. /14
Sandberg: "privacy and advertising are not at odds... users have control over info we use."
This later statement is not, in fact, fully honest, as many better experts have discussed. /16
Jack: sort of [context should be more apparent] /19
Sandberg: "we've worked hard to simplify this," highlights "download my information" function
W: shouldn't they know what the value of this info is?
SS: [regulation is coming, yeah, we know] /20
SS: "I strongly believe that." [did she just say FB has legal obligation on this? interesting] /21
SS: security team + others
Risch is about to ask about conservative repression. wait for it. /22
SS: yes for political/issue ads
Risch: can citizens of other countries comment on politics?
SS: in free content yes, in advertising no.
Jack: same. Sometimes have to infer account locations /23
Jack: we focus more on behavioral patterns on the platform, how network is used to spread information. Our machine learning recognizes these patterns and shuts them down more quickly.
[This is actually really smart] /25
should protections on privacy be a national security priority? -- both say yes /26
Wyden: microtargeting to discourage voting -- powerful tool.
ss: it's not just the Russians [it really isn't]
Wyden: so what are doing about it?
SS: [responds on ads, again, not the point] /28
Jack: [confused about hoax -- Wyden should have said CONSPIRACIES]
SS: iran accounts pretended to be news... /29
SS: we don't store data in Vietnam, or turn it over /31
SS: "we'll have to continue to learn." getting faster at identifying threats.
Jack: in Mexico, allowed reporting of suspicious behavior. We're also focusing on patterns of behavior/dissemination /34
SS: sure. trust matters.
Jack: yes, but we need to question fundamental incentives in our whole product. [this could be good, or really terrifying] /35
[no, nope. that isn't how it works.] /36
She then points out hundreds of thousands of people were targeted with misinfo on her and she found out from clemson. Jack squirms. She says to make more data available for researchers [YES] /37
SS:.. ummm. not sure.
Harris: but when content is inflammatory and that is most engaged with, how do you reconcile that with revenue models? Cites examples of selective content reviewing that are racist /38
Harris: so you no longer protect w/hate speech policy only certain, designated groups?
ss: will check. /39
Jack: considering transparency report on suspensions.
Blunt: archive. not report.
Jack: need to look at legal implications. /40
SS: inauthenticity is characteristic. in US, most is domestic. most Russian activity targets russians. /41
More questions about why platforms are deleting info from accounts they pulled down, and not making it available for research etc. /42
Lankford: what's the relationship with Whatsapp?
SS: yes it's encrypted.
SS: it's getting better. It's prohibited
Jack: Same here. trying. /44
Jack: open to discussing that.
Manchin: why aren't you in China?
[both blocked by Chinese govt]
Jack: not worth fighting. eh.
SS: can't be there with our values /45
Jack: no. we also don't like actors who use twitter data for 24 hr surveillance.
Cotton: would you reconsider working with CIA?
Jack: global policy on surveillance/47
Cotton: do you see difference between US and hostile foreign actors?
Jack: don't want to enable surveillance.
Cotton: you both still have Assange and wikileaks, which are a hostile foreign intelligence proxy. why? /48
jack: no violation of terms of service. open to law enforcement insight that would inform that /49
which gets back to earlier questions re what is the value -- and are we all getting the crap end of the deal [yes] /50
Tweeps. Data is the new labor. Get it now? /51
Burr hits on right point -- target is American people. /53